Nicaragua vs Zimbabwe: Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square

Nicaragua
2,415 current US$ per square kilometre
in 2021
Zimbabwe
2,199 current US$ per square kilometre
in 2021
Nicaragua rank
39th
Zimbabwe rank
41st

Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square over time

  • Nicaragua
  • Zimbabwe
05001.0k1.5k2.0k2.5k197019952021

How they compare

Nicaragua currently reports 2,415 current US$ per square kilometre against 2,199 current US$ per square kilometre in Zimbabwe, a difference of 216 current US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Nicaragua's figure about 1.1 times Zimbabwe's.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 52 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Zimbabwe ahead.

Nicaragua ranks 39th and Zimbabwe ranks 41st of 216 countries.

Zimbabwe has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Nicaragua Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1970s 27.4 current US$ per square kilometre 86.94 current US$ per square kilometre 59.54 current US$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe
1980s 16 current US$ per square kilometre 132.32 current US$ per square kilometre 116.31 current US$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe
1990s 6.24 current US$ per square kilometre 164.1 current US$ per square kilometre 157.86 current US$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2000s 51.68 current US$ per square kilometre 245.39 current US$ per square kilometre 193.71 current US$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2010s 559.76 current US$ per square kilometre 668.82 current US$ per square kilometre 109.06 current US$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe
2020s 1,227 current US$ per square kilometre 1,565 current US$ per square kilometre 338.49 current US$ per square kilometre Zimbabwe

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current us$), per square, Nicaragua or Zimbabwe?
Nicaragua, at 2,415 current US$ per square kilometre against 2,199 current US$ per square kilometre in Zimbabwe as of 2021.
What is the difference in adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current us$), per square between Nicaragua and Zimbabwe?
216 current US$ per square kilometre, with Nicaragua ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Nicaragua and Zimbabwe?
52 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2021.
How do Nicaragua and Zimbabwe rank globally for adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current us$), per square?
Nicaragua ranks 39th and Zimbabwe ranks 41st of 216 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Nicaragua vs Zimbabwe: Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 28 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/adjusted-savings-mineral-depletion-current-us-per-square-kilometre/nicaragua/zimbabwe/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/adjusted-savings-mineral-depletion-current-us-per-square-kilometre/nicaragua/zimbabwe/">Nicaragua vs Zimbabwe: Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$), per square kilometre
Unit
current US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
217 places, 10,348 data points, 1970–2021
Last refreshed

Adjusted savings: mineral depletion (current US$) divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.